site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 17, 2025

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

4
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Looking at this federal funding data sheet, I am reading that IMLS funding in 2024 was $268 million, with $211m distributed through the Library Services and Technology Act, which based on this 2022 factsheet by the American Libraries Association is the "only source of dedicated federal funding for the more than 116,000 public, school, academic, government, and special libraries across the nation."

I would agree that damn, look at that $268m - $211m, there is waste here of $67m somehow. And yes, for the 168million people that live in America that file taxes, they should either get their $0.40 back or DOGE can get it better spent.

But let's circle back to the federal disbursement of funds to libraries. Let's assume that $211m was equally distributed among the states, that's $211m/50 = $4.22m per state. Let's pick a random state, like Alabama, and look at their state budget for 2024. Specifically we can go to page 66 on the pdf (or 61 by the page numbering) to see that $18.3m was the total appropriation and $6.6m of that going to "amount earmarked for state aid to local libraries". I'm going to assume $4.22 would have been extra to the above, which would account for 4.22/(18.3 + 4.22) = 18.7% of funding for libraries in Alabama.

Is 18.7% a lot? Maybe. Is 81.3% a lot more? Absolutely. We can see that a lot of library funding is already dominated by local spending. I don't see how libraries are examples of where there is federal overreach or forcing the hand of states in terms of state-federal relationships. In fact if we look at the budget of Alabama on page 6 of the pdf (or 1 by the page numbering), the state had on hand 8.8b + 3b = $11.8b, which is then supplemented by 18.6b + 15b = 33.6b from elsewhere. This is the total inverse relationship where local funding is dwarfed by federal funding.

Actually, I found this pdf from Auburn University at Montgomery from 2022 which on page 7 has a diagram of 2019 funding where it shows 0.9% of Alabama funding for libraries was from the federal government. That in 2022, Alabama received $2.7m, which is way less than the $4.22m assumption I made above.

I can understand where you're coming from with regards to the balance of powers between national/federal and regional/state actors or the power of the purse and the carrot/stick strategy every administration uses against the state governments. But in this particular situation about library funding, I don't see how it holds water.

Let's assume that $211m was equally distributed among the states

It is not. They make their largest grants to state libraries, but they don't distribute it evenly. In 2024 they didn't even give Alabama state libraries a grant at all! California got $15,705,702 for their state library system, the only grant that went to anybody in Alabama whatsoever in 2024 was $184,876 to the Alabama African American Civil Rights Heritage Sites Consortium.

Here's the full list of 2024 grantees under their "Grants to State Libraries" program:

California State Library $15,705,702

Texas State Library and Archives Commission $12,512,132

State Library of Florida $9,533,426

New York State Library $8,125,215

Pennsylvania Office of Commonwealth Libraries $5,891,819

Illinois State Library $5,736,330

State Library of Ohio $5,448,084

Georgia Board of Regents $5,162,498

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources $5,089,381

Library of Michigan $4,788,124

New Jersey State Library $4,506,420

Library of Virginia $4,289,358

Washington State Library $3,948,629

Arizona State Library $3,804,635

Tennessee State Library and Archives $3,689,581

Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners $3,642,371

Indiana State Library $3,589,836

Missouri State Library $3,338,467

Maryland State Library Agency $3,332,465

WI Div. for Libraries and Community Learning $3,230,831

Colorado Department of Education $3,218,246

MN Dept of CFL/Library Development & Services $3,165,524

South Carolina State Library $3,028,013

State Library of Louisiana $2,726,161

KY Department for Libraries and Archives $2,708,198

Oregon State Library $2,597,695

Oklahoma Department of Libraries $2,529,938

Utah State Library Division $2,289,874

State Library of Iowa $2,210,343

Nevada State Library and Archives $2,205,502

Connecticut State Library $2,164,184

Arkansas State Library $2,157,781

PR Dept. of ED/Public Library Programs $2,147,080

Kansas State Library $2,109,780

Mississippi Library Commission $2,109,457

New Mexico State Library $1,797,977

Nebraska Library Commission $1,746,652

Idaho State Library $1,741,500

West Virginia Library Commission $1,668,036

Hawaii State Public Library System $1,541,630

New Hampshire State Library $1,529,144

Maine State Library $1,526,754

Montana State Library, Natural Resource Information System $1,427,530

Rhode Island Office of Library & Information Services $1,413,623

Delaware Division of Libraries $1,389,442

South Dakota State Library $1,346,956

State Library, North Dakota $1,295,858

Alaska State Library $1,276,792

District of Columbia Public Library $1,256,248

State of Vermont Department of Libraries $1,244,357

Wyoming State Library $1,220,427

Right, I think this furthers prove my point that in terms of "economic and social policy", regional governors and politicians often have far more control over their library system than the federal government.

I agree, which is why they'll be fine if the IMLS disappears. They don't need other people's money to get by.